[EL] ELB News and Commentary 3/29/16
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Tue Mar 29 07:30:54 PDT 2016
ideo: “Symposium – Free Speech Under Fire: The Future of the First
Amendment” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81308>
Posted onMarch 29, 2016 7:22 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81308>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here are videos from the excellent Brooklyn Law conference:
Video: 1
<https://www.brooklaw.edu/about-us/mediagallery/Videos/law-school-programs-events/2016-02-26/0?>|2
<https://www.brooklaw.edu/about-us/mediagallery/Videos/law-school-programs-events/2016-02-26/1?>|3
<https://www.brooklaw.edu/about-us/mediagallery/Videos/law-school-programs-events/2016-02-26/2?>|4
<https://www.brooklaw.edu/about-us/mediagallery/Videos/law-school-programs-events/2016-02-26/3?>|5
<https://www.brooklaw.edu/about-us/mediagallery/Videos/law-school-programs-events/2016-02-26/4?>|6
<https://www.brooklaw.edu/about-us/mediagallery/Videos/law-school-programs-events/2016-02-26/5?>
The first link is to Floyd Abrams’ keynote address. The third link is a
panel on campaign finance and the First Amendment, which includes Brad
Smith, Sabeel Rahman, and me, moderated by Joel Gora.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81308&title=Video%3A%20%26%238220%3BSymposium%20%26%238211%3B%20Free%20Speech%20Under%20Fire%3A%20The%20Future%20of%20the%20First%20Amendment%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Trump Camp Will File RNC Complaint Over Delegates, Not A Lawsuit”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81306>
Posted onMarch 29, 2016 7:17 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81306>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
TPM
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-rnc-complaint-louisiana-delegates>:
An adviser to Donald Trump’s campaign on Wednesday clarified that
the campaign will file a complaint with the Republican National
Committee (RNC) over the selection of delegates in the Louisiana
primary, not a lawsuit, as Trumpsuggested
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donal-trump-lawsuit-louisiana-delegates>in
a Sunday tweet.
Trump’s lawsuit threatfollowed
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donal-trump-lawsuit-louisiana-delegates>a
report that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) could gain up to 10 unbound
delegates from the Louisiana primary, five of which were previously
committed to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) before he dropped out of the
presidential race. Trump won the primary, but could end up with
fewer delegates than Cruz. Delegates supporting Cruz have also
secured five of Louisiana’s six slots on the rules committee for the
Republican convention.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81306&title=%26%238220%3BTrump%20Camp%20Will%20File%20RNC%20Complaint%20Over%20Delegates%2C%20Not%20A%20Lawsuit%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inpolitical parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>
“Parties, Independence and the State of Anti-Corruption
Jurisprudence” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81304>
Posted onMarch 29, 2016 7:16 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81304>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bauer
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2016/03/parties-independence-state-anti-corruption-jurisprudence/>:
Louisianais arguing
<http://www.fec.gov/law/litigation/lagop_lagop_complaint.pdf>with
the help of the indefatigable Jim Bopp that McCain-Feingold cannot
limit “federal election activities”, such as GOTV and voter
registration, that state and local parties conduct independently,
without coordinating with their candidates. Democracy 21, the
Campaign Legal Center and Public Citizenreply in a brief filed as
amici that
<http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/sites/default/files/LA%20Repub%20PC-D21-CLC%20amicus%20brief%20as%20filed.pdf>this
claim is clearly foreclosed by existing precedent: the soft money
limits on state parties under McCain-Feingold are contribution
limits, not spending limits, and there is no protection gained from
claiming to conduct independently the activities paid with these
contributions.
The litigating team representing these leading reform organizations
is top-notch, and so it is not a surprise in reading their brief
that they do a fine job with the materials at hand. But one also
sees that there is a problem—not with the advocacy, but with the
state of the law.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81304&title=%26%238220%3BParties%2C%20Independence%20and%20the%20State%20of%20Anti-Corruption%20Jurisprudence%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Jonathan Soros to Charles Koch: You’re wrong on government’s role”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81302>
Posted onMarch 29, 2016 7:15 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81302>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
CNN oped
<http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/28/opinions/letter-to-a-koch-brother-opinion-soros/index.html>:
Dear Charles Koch,
I don’t know you any better than you know Bernie Sanders, but I very
much appreciate your recent effortin a Washington Post op-ed
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-koch-this-is-the-one-issue-where-bernie-sanders-is-right/2016/02/18/cdd2c228-d5c1-11e5-be55-2cc3c1e4b76b_story.html>to
publicly identify common ground with him about our “political and
economic system that is often rigged to help the privileged few at
the expense of everyone else.” I would like to attempt the same with
you.
Many who share my political views will call you a hypocrite or
worse, but as someone who sees daily attacks against my family that
I view as slanderous, I have always been more inclined to allow that
you are principally motivated by what you believe to be in the
public interest, even if it often coincides with your financial
interest.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81302&title=%26%238220%3BJonathan%20Soros%20to%20Charles%20Koch%3A%20You%26%238217%3Bre%20wrong%20on%20government%26%238217%3Bs%20role%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
Damage Control Dep’t <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81300>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 8:19 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81300>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
NYT’s Alex Burns
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/29/us/politics/donald-trumps-success-upends-battle-for-control-of-congress.html?ref=politics&_r=0>:
Some party leaders remain hopeful that they can block Mr. Trump by
denying him a majority of the delegates to the July convention and
coalescing support around another candidate.
But the National Republican Senatorial Committee has already
conducted polling to test the message that Republicans must control
the Senate as a check against a President Hillary Clinton, and that
Democrats must not be allowed to fully control the appointment and
confirmation of Supreme Court judges, according to two people
briefed on the research, who spoke on the condition of anonymity
because it was intended to be confidential.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81300&title=Damage%20Control%20Dep%26%238217%3Bt&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Rebecca Bradley, JoAnne Kloppenburg signal political leanings”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81298>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 8:16 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81298>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel:
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/rebecca-bradley-joanne-kloppenburg-signal-political-leanings-b99692679z1-373726851.html>
The candidates for state Supreme Court are largely mum about their
views on key cases, but they have given clear signs showing
incumbent Rebecca Bradley lines up with conservatives and challenger
JoAnne Kloppenburg with liberals.
Bradley has repeatedly praised recently deceased conservative U.S.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and his commitment to
interpreting constitutional provisions as they were intended by the
founders.
Kloppenburg has praised liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg, criticized Scalia’s approach in at least one case
and questioned the state high court’s ruling last year upholding
Wisconsin’s voter ID law.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81298&title=%26%238220%3BRebecca%20Bradley%2C%20JoAnne%20Kloppenburg%20signal%20political%20leanings%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,judicial
elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
“Blagojevich Cert. Denial Seen as Bad Sign for McDonnell”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81296>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 8:12 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81296>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bloomberg BNA
<http://news.bna.com/mpdm/MPDMWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=86001601&vname=mpebulallissues&jd=a0j1h5t4w7&split=0>:
he U.S. Supreme Court’s denial of a petition for review of former
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s (D) corruption case could signal
that the justices are unlikely to overturn the conviction of former
Virginia Gov. Robert McDonnell (R) according to a prominent legal
expert (Blagojevich v. U.S., U.S., No. 15-664,cert. denied3/28/16).
Blagojevich currently is serving a 14-year prison sentence following
his 2011 conviction on charges of extorting campaign contributions
and seeking personal benefits in return for favors he offered as
governor. The Supreme Court denied March 28 a petition filed by his
lawyers asking for review of a federal appeals court ruling that
upheld 13 of the 18 corruption counts on which Blagojevich was
convicted.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81296&title=%26%238220%3BBlagojevich%20Cert.%20Denial%20Seen%20as%20Bad%20Sign%20for%20McDonnell%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inbribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>
“EAC & FVAP Team Up to Serve Election Officials and Voters”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81294>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 8:08 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81294>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Blog
<http://www.eac.gov/blogs/eac__fvap_team_up_to_serve_election_officials_and_voters/>:
/This blog post is a joint blog post from EAC Commissioner Matthew
Masterson and Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) Director Matt
Boehmer/.
Last week, both EAC and FVAP had the pleasure of traveling to New
Jersey to meet with Lieutenant Governor Kim Guadagno and advocacy
groups from across New Jersey. During our visit, we also had the
privilege of speaking at the annual New Jersey election official
conference. It was a fantastic three days of listening and learning
from and with the election officials of New Jersey.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81294&title=%26%238220%3BEAC%20%26%23038%3B%20FVAP%20Team%20Up%20to%20Serve%20Election%20Officials%20and%20Voters%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“The Language Barrier in the Voting Booth”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81292>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 8:05 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81292>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Terry Ao Minnis and Adam Ambrogi inGoverning
<http://www.governing.com/gov-institute/voices/col-improved-language-assistance-voters.html>:
During the Democratic presidential caucus in Nevada last month, the
issue of language assistance in elections came up front and center
—and it was not pretty
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/21/why-neither-side-is-quite-right-in-their-reads-on-that-dolores-huerta-english-only-shout-down/>.
Fingers pointed in all directions about what actually happened and
who was to blame, but what is clear is that there were caucus
participants who needed assistance in Spanish to fully understand
the process and their options and that they did not receive this
essential help. This incident highlights how important language
assistance in the political process is and why more must be done to
ensure that language needs are being accommodated.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81292&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Language%20Barrier%20in%20the%20Voting%20Booth%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“Grassley: Democrats Could Force a Vote on Nominee”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81290>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 5:39 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81290>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Roll Call:
<http://www.rollcall.com/news/grassley-democrats-force-vote-nominee>
A top Republican senator said Monday he expects Democrats to force
at least a procedural vote on President Barack Obama’s nominee to
the Supreme Court, challenging the GOP’s insistence that the
appointment be left for the next president.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, said
Democrats will likely try a maneuver known as a motion to discharge
to move the nomination out of the committee and onto the Senate floor.
“I don’t think that there’s any way Republicans can keep from having
a vote … sometime between now and the election,” Grassley said at a
town hall meeting in Iowa’s northwestern corner.
“If [Republicans] think they’re going to avoid this issue entirely,
under the rules of the Senate, it isn’t possible because of various
motions that can be made,” he added.
That doesn’t mean they’ll succeed in appointing Obama’s nominee,
Merrick Garland.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81290&title=%26%238220%3BGrassley%3A%20Democrats%20Could%20Force%20a%20Vote%20on%20Nominee%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Hillary Clinton on the Supreme Court and Citizens United”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81288>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 4:48 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81288>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Every Voice brings us
<http://talkingaboutmoneyin2016.tumblr.com/post/141866553033/hillary-clinton-on-the-supreme-court-and-citizens>excerpts
from today’s speech.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81288&title=%26%238220%3BHillary%20Clinton%20on%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20and%20Citizens%20United%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“A Look At Voter Access Across The U.S.”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81286>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 4:30 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81286>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Diane Rehm Show
<https://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2016-03-28/a-look-at-voter-access-across-the-u-s>:
In an election season already full of firsts, here’s another: this
will be the first presidential election since the Supreme Court
struck down a key part of the Voting Rights Act in 2013. And in 16
states new voting restrictions will be in place for the first time.
Recently, thousands stood in line for hours waiting to cast their
primary ballots in states like Utah, Arizona, and Idaho. Some warn
this is a sign of what’s to come in the general election and beyond:
roadblocks to voting that disproportionately affect minorities and
the most vulnerable Americans. Others argue we’re closer now to a
fair system. A look at access to voting across the U.S.
Guests
* Ari Bermansenior contributing writer, The Nation; author of
“Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in
America”
* Carrie Johnsonjustice correspondent, NPR
* Jan Baranhead of the election law group at Wiley Rein LLP;
former general counsel, Republican National Committee; author,
“The Election Law Primer for Corporations.”
* Guy-Uriel Charlesprofessor of law, Duke Law School; founding
director of the Duke Law Center on Law, Race and Politics
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81286&title=%26%238220%3BA%20Look%20At%20Voter%20Access%20Across%20The%20U.S.%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“Philip Morris to SCOTUS: Don’t revisit corporate money in judicial
elections” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81284>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 3:58 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81284>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Alison
Frankel<http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2016/03/28/philip-morris-to-scotus-dont-revisit-corporate-money-in-judicial-elections/>for
Reuters:
If the Supreme Court is interested in revisiting the issue of
campaign contributions and the appearance of judicial bias, it has a
vehicle. In January, Illinois state court class action plaintiffs
who won a $10 billion judgment against Philip Morris in 2003 for
allegedly misrepresenting its “light” cigarettes filed apetition for
certiorari
<http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/2016/03/pricevphilipmorris-certpetition.pdf>,
claiming that their due process rights were violated because
Illinois Supreme Court Justice*Lloyd Karmeier*refused to step aside
<http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2014/11/03/the-problem-with-judicial-elections-illinois-supreme-court-edition/>when
his court reviewed a state appellate decision to reinstate the
judgment against Philip Morris. The case obviously has a long and
tortured history – including an unsuccessful cert petition after the
Illinois Supreme Court first overturned the judgment in 2005 – but
for the purposes of this column, all that matters is the plaintiffs’
assertion that Justice Karmeier had no business participating in the
Illinois Supreme Court’sdecision
<http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/2016/03/pricevphilipmorris-ilsupremecourt1.pdf>last
fall to bounce the judgment a second time.
According to Supreme Court counsel from*Kellogg, Huber, Hansen,
Todd, Evans & Figel*, Justice Karmeier should have recused himself
because Philip Morris indirectly contributed to his 2004 and 2014
campaigns through pro-business groups and because the state judge
told a reporter on the night of the 2014 election that the potential
billion-dollar fee award for plaintiffs lawyers was “distorting the
system.”…
More than a dozen former state appellate judges, including several
onetime state chief justices, filed anamicus brief
<http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/2016/03/pricevphilipmorris-formerjudges.pdf>backing
the cert petition. The former judges said they’re worried about the
appearance of bias when state justices are perceived to have taken
money from one side in a big case. “In exceptional cases, as this
court has recognized, the Constitution’s guarantee of due process
may require recusal notwithstanding a judge’s subjective
determination that he is unbiased,” wrote the judges’ counsel at
Hogan Lovells. “This case tests that threshold. Despite the
appearance – at a minimum – of impropriety, Justice Karmeier went on
to cast the decisive vote to deny petitioners their verdict. He did
so not once, but twice. This Court should grant certiorari to
establish that the Constitution requires recusal when the judge
cannot be impartial due to significant contributions from a party in
a pending case.”
Philip Morris’opposition brief
<http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/files/2016/03/wellsvgutierrez-certpetition.pdf>,
filed Friday by*Winston & Strawn, Mayer Brown*and*Arnold & Porter*,
argues that Justice Karmeier did not actually accept campaign
contributions from the company, even indirectly, and never made
pejorative public comments about plaintiffs lawyers.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81284&title=%26%238220%3BPhilip%20Morris%20to%20SCOTUS%3A%20Don%E2%80%99t%20revisit%20corporate%20money%20in%20judicial%20elections%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial elections
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
“The Finances of a Second Chance” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81282>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 3:36 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81282>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ciara Torres-Spelliscy writes.
<https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/finances-second-chance>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81282&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Finances%20of%20a%20Second%20Chance%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“2015 Lobbying Disclosure: Observations on Lobbyists’ Compliance
with Disclosure Requirements” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81280>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 3:35 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81280>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
*2015 Lobbying Disclosure: Observations on Lobbyists’ Compliance with
Disclosure Requirements.*
GAO-16-320, March 24
* Report: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-320
<http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTYwMzI0LjU2OTUzNTYxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE2MDMyNC41Njk1MzU2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MDI5NzU0JmVtYWlsaWQ9c2NvdHRAcG9nby5vcmcmdXNlcmlkPXNjb3R0QHBvZ28ub3JnJmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&100&&&http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-320?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery>
* Highlights: http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/676054.pdf
<http://links.govdelivery.com/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTYwMzI0LjU2OTUzNTYxJm1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDE2MDMyNC41Njk1MzU2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE3MDI5NzU0JmVtYWlsaWQ9c2NvdHRAcG9nby5vcmcmdXNlcmlkPXNjb3R0QHBvZ28ub3JnJmZsPSZleHRyYT1NdWx0aXZhcmlhdGVJZD0mJiY=&&&101&&&http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/676054.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81280&title=%26%238220%3B2015%20Lobbying%20Disclosure%3A%20Observations%20on%20Lobbyists%26%238217%3B%20Compliance%20with%20Disclosure%20Requirements%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inlobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>
Krishnakumar Remembrance of Beth Garrett
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81278>
Posted onMarch 28, 2016 3:31 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81278>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
From Anita Krishnakumar:
Beth was an absolute gem. She was a powerhouse – but a delightful,
charming, generous powerhouse. She was of course an incredible
intellect, but what I remember most about her was her unflagging
energy, her good humor, and her willingness to help out those, like
me, who looked up to and admired her. I first met Beth because I
published a student article in the Harvard Journal on Legislation
that happened to end up in the same issue as her wonderful, much
better, article, Rethinking the Structures of Decisionmaking in the
Federal Budget Process. Beth read my student article, reached out
to me and, characteristically, offered to read other papers I might
be working on, ended up giving me advice about going on the teaching
market and inviting me to a conference – actually two conferences –
about the federal budget process over the years. She was, as so
many others have attested, extremely generous with her time and
encouragement, as well as with her insights. I am afraid that I
ultimately disappointed Beth by abandoning the budget process as a
topic and starting to write about trends in statutory interpretation
instead (something she once lamented good-naturedly to me). Despite
that chiding, I will very much miss her, as I know so many others
will as well. May she rest in peace.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D81278&title=Krishnakumar%20Remembrance%20of%20Beth%20Garrett&description=>
Posted inelection law biz <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>
--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160329/ddd86eac/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160329/ddd86eac/attachment.png>
View list directory